
OFTFItJIAT^ OONAXTON. 



SEN ATE. J Document 

j No. 153. 



STATEHOOD FOR THE TERRITORIES. 



Mr. (tallinger presentt^d the follow] no- 

PAPERS RELATING TO THE OTESTION OF STATEHOOD FOR THE 

TERRITORIES. 



Fehki ary 14, 190.S. — Ordered to ])e printed. 



address of hon. w. b. guilders, retiring president of the new 
mexico bar association, at the seventeenth annual session 
held at santa fe, n. mex., january 12, 1903. 

New Mexico Bar Associaton, 

Office of the Secretary, 
Situhi Fe, X. JAvr., Jan nary IS, 1903. 

SEVENTEENTH ANNI AI. MEETING. 

I. the unchTsicrncd. Edward L. Hartlett. st^cretary of the above asso- 
ciation, hei'eln' certify that at an adjourned meeting of said association, 
held on the I2tli day of January. It)(i3. Hon. Williani J^. C'hilders. tin* 
retiring nrevidcnt of said association, in accoidancc with tlie by-laws, 
delivered his address as such {)re^ident. which i-^ in woi-ds and figures 
following, viz: 

(tentlemen of the Bar Association of New Mexico: It has 
occurred to me that the most appropriate subject for discussion l)y 
this association at the ])i-esent time is the measure ptMiding in the Sen- 
ate of the Unitefl State-, for the admission of our Teri-itoi'y into the 
union of States. 

1 regret. howcNcr. that tlie demands u})on my time for tlie past few 
weeks ha\e been so impeiative as to j)i'e\('nt me from gi\ ing tlu» sul)- 
ject the careful eouNidci at ion and ]»aiiistaking research its importance 
demands. 

I believe that it is eminently projH'r that tliis association should a.ssert 
itself on this subject, iind make all th<' influence it has. felt in formings 
and dii'ccting pul>lic opinion in .New M<'.\ico. in ( 'ongre-<s. and in the 
coimti'v at large. Indeed, I do not see how any int^'lligent citizen of 
New Aiexico can helj) but take the keenest int<'rest in tl)is subject. If 
there lias ever been a time in the histoiy of.tlu; 'JVj'.'"'b»!'>' >v,beij,it was 
confronted with a ci'isis. it is now. I :*::* : \ \"', \-'. '■ 

Whenever (juestions so vitally atle( t iiig tlu'' weH'- b('iir«- \yf pi'Oph- 



67th Congsess, \ 
2d Session, f 



STATEHOOD FOR THE TERRITORIES. 



as the riu-ht of solt'-govcM-niiKMit, and I'oprcsciitation in th(^ siiprouie 
law-iiiakino- power, have ai iseii. the ))ar, in all countries, either free or 
seeking to he free, has ])een loicniost in the creation and direction 
of public opinion. Members of our pi'ofession have ever stood forth 
as the champions and advocates of the right of the people to govei-n 
th(Mn.selv(*s. 

K(M*(Mitl y tht^ connnittce of the Senate of the United States visited oui- 
Territory, and, aftei* sp(>nding tive or six days in thvi^r or foui" locali- 
ties, has made a I'eport, publishing to the world th(^ conclusions reached 
by them, not only that we are not entitled by right of htiu^ss or pul^lic 
policy to become a Stat(^ in the Union and g()V(M-n ourselves imder 
our own Stat(^ constitution and to representation in th(^ Congress of tlN^\ 
United Stat(\s, but that we nev(M" will })(> (Mititled. })y r(>ason of capac- 
ity, population, resources, or from the standpoint of public policy, to 
exerciser such right. 

This repoi't means this, oi- it means nothing at all. This is a matter 
of easy dcMuonsti'ation from th(^ report itscdf. 

It is not my purpose to attem})t a vindication of the people of New 
M(^xic() against th(^ aspersions cast u[)on tliem by this report. We 
know that the repoi't of the evidenc(^ pretcMided to have been taken 
before this committee is inaccurate, garbled, and misk^ading. Indi- 
viduals who have l)een thus misr-epresent(^d may d(Miy the accuracy 
and correctness of the pretended repoi-t of what tliey said before this 
committ(^e. We, as a people, howc^ver. can not hvlp feeling our utter 
helplessness when thus attacked by the i'eport of a committcn^ of a l)ody 
usually so just, cons{M'\'ativ(\ and august as the Senate of the United 
States. All we can do is to express our gratitude to those noble 
champions of the pririci])les of popular rights and fvoc g()V(M'nm(Mit. 
who are, in the debate now in progress in the vSenate of the United 
States, repelling th(^ unjust assaults upon a people without their own 
chosen represi^itatives to advocate their cause. 

I especially desire to direct your attention to the new conditions 
proposed hy this re])ort for the admission of a Territory into the Union 
of Statics: conditions which 1 believe have no foundation in constitu- 
tional law. and arc unsupported ])y historical precedent. 

These conditions are not only no\'el, l>ut. according to this report, 
will for all time l)e impossible of fulHllment by New Mexico. The 
n^port says: 

Indeed, it would have been well, and would now be well, if the rule could be 
adopted, that any new State should have a population equal to the average popula- 
tion of the remainder of the States. This rule would require a population at the 
])resent time of 1,650,000, and, as has heenstat(Ml, New ^Mexico's population is 195,010, 
and that of Arizona 122,981. 

The report then deduc(\s. f r(mi the alleged evidence as reported by 
the committ(M% and other data, the conclusion that New Mexico and 
Arizona will pr()l)ably never have th(^ re<]uisite population. It pro- 
claims to the world that th(^ present inhabitants of Arizona and New 
Mexico are not only unfit for statehood, but that thv ri^sources of the 
T(M'ritories give no promise of ever sustaining a population entitling 
th(Mn to that right. I say right, Ix^cause I believe it to ])e a right, 
founded, as our ( rovermiKMit was formed, upon the iinmutal)le principles 
oi^ free government. 

/^*L(*Uif>ijfC)r a inoiiaui *J()nsi(l('r thi proposition. If New Mexico is 
h()tv'*'(lvfiirr[ ntelini.^^^Krti'bt'cause she has not this average population, she 



STATEHOOD FOR THE TERRITORIES. 



3 



never can hope for admission, for the reason that slie can never hope 
to attain this average at the time of admission. The proposition is 
that the average "at the pre-^ent time" is 1. 650. 000. What will it be 
live or ten years hence i To attain snch an average she mnst far out- 
strip the States of the Union in gi'owth and development. Such a 
proposition means "Bureaucratic" government, from Washington, 
for all time. The committee seems, however, to think this is a desir- 
able form of government. The report says:' 

This compels consideration of a much-used argument, that the people of a Territory 
are deprived of self-government, and are entitled, as a right, to this great privilege. 
This argument is refuted by the fact that the people of the Territory enjoy practically 
all of the substance of self-government that the people of the States enjoy, save only 
the power of creating unlimited del)t. It is easy to see how persons interested in 
enterprises f(jr which they hope for aid from the people's pockets might want this 
restriction removed, but it is not easy to see what advantage it will be to the people 
themselves to have it removed. 

Is it true that the people of a Territory enjoy practicalh' all of the 
sul).stance of self-government that is enjoyed by the people of a State ? 
The governor, secretary, and judges in a Territory are appointed 
from Washington. For the past few years some, but not all, of them 
have been appointed from the residents of the Territory. It was the 
rule formerly, and in many instances still is in practice, to reward the 
protege's supporters and followei's of political chiefs with these appoint- 
ments. But whether appointed from the Territories or from without, 
they are not responsi))Ie, nor amenal)le, to the people of the Territo- 
ries. Public opinion in the Territoi'ies is not a factor. It can be com- 
pared to nothing in the nature of government so appropriately as to 
the proconsulai- government of a Roman pr()\ ince. If, justly or 
unjustly, these public servants are to l)e called to account for the 
administration of their offices, it is not before tlie bar of pu))lic opin- 
ion of any people that they are to be arraigned. Charges are made 
to a department in Washington, justh' or unjustly, and upon such 
charge — ex parte affidavits, crimination and reci'imination — the tenure 
of the official often depends. 

Under such a sy.stem there can be no healthy public opinion. Unde i- 
such a system official responsibility and int(^grity can never l)e what a 
free people should demand. Under it it is difficult foi' the public ofii- 
cial to ha\'e that sense of independence and responsibility so necessary 
to a pi'opei- discharge of his duties. Under such a system th(^ su})})ort 
of j)ubnc opinion for the public ser\'ant. so necessary in free govern- 
ment, i^ wanting. 

In many instances the support of powerful })olitical friends has suf- 
ficed to protect the guilty, and the want of such sui)})ort has worked 
the condenmation of the iimocent. Would the peoph' of Indiana call 
this "enjoying i)racticaliy all of the substance of self-govermiMit f 

In what I ha\'e >aid I do not mean to i-elleci upon any particular 
present or past incuml)ent of a Territoi ial ofiice. It is the system I am 
fliscussing. I ha\ (' failed to tind any justilication. e\"en in the e\ idence 
re])orted by the committee, foi- what is said in the foregoing extract 
with reference to the removal of icstrictions u|)on contracting public 
del)ts in aid of ])ul)lic ciiterpriNCv. All of ii> know \\(dl lliat any such 
attempt in New Mexico would meet with no success. 1 do not doubt 
that any constitution drafte(l and submitted to the people of New- 
Mexico would contain niore drjistic restrictions than the present act of 
Congress know!i as the " Harrison Act." 



4 



STATEHOOD FOR THE TERRITORIES. 



Th(' final conclusion of the committee is as follows: 

So that upon the que:^tion of seh'-government the whole matter is narrowed down 
to a voting representation in Congress, and thus affects the people of the Territory 
only as it has to do with tlie shaping of the various policies of the entire nation, ancl 
thus this argument is reduced to the crux of the whole matter, to wit: The recjuisites 
entitling a body of territory to a participation in the formation of great national 
policies. 

Is this true in principles, or in fact ^ Could not the same objec- 
tion have been made to the admission of Vermont, with its 45,000 
people, and to (^very State since We need representation in Congress 
to protect our local interests far more than old States needed it. The 
interests of the old States are bound up in the results of national 
policies, except as to a few^ appropriations. We know how difficult it 
has been to protect ourselves against spoliation by national legislation 
in the past few years. 

National politics subserve the interests of the old States far more 
than they do ours. Kepresentation is necessary to New Mexico to 
protect our Territory against spoliation. It took Congress forty years 
to enact a law to pass upon Mexican and Spanish titles in New Mexico. 
It passed a law to settle those titles in California in less than three years 
after her admission into the Union. This committee claims that we 
have not increased the diversion of water from our streams since the 
cession of New Mexico to the United States. At this very time a bill 
is pending in Congress making it a crime to divert ^.n}^ more water 
from the Rio Grande. The people of the Territor}^ have for several 
years felt it necessary to send at their own expense delegations to 
Washington to beg and plead for protection against the deprivatioil of 
their natural I'ights. 

The answer of the committee to the demands of New Mexico does 
not differ in principle or logic from the answer of Lord North and 
George the Third to Massachusetts and Virginia when they refused to 
submit to taxation without representation. Is the right to full citizen- 
ship, to the exercise of ever}^ right and privilege, a mere sentimen- 
tality? Has it no higher value in the opinion of the majority of the 
United States Senate? Is the immortal declaration "that all just 
government rests upon the consent of the governed " the mere mouth- 
ing of a phrase maker ? To hold a Territory in a state of perpetual or 
even protracted tutelage results in nothing but a condition of arrested 
development. This report is probably the first time that the principle 
of local self-government as a factor in American institutions — illus- 
trated as it is by almost every governing body of the Union, from a 
New England town meeting to the chief executive and legislature of a 
State — has been so contemptuously appraised by American statesmen. 

It is difficult to understand how American statesmen can proclaim 
to the world that the ambition of the people to have a voice in the 
formation of national policies that may mean weal or vfoe to them 
should fall upon deaf ears. 

The people of the Territories have not the wealth of the great 
States in the Union, })ut their stake in the result of national policies is 
not for that n^ason any less. "Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happi- 
ness," our forefathers declared, were the purposes to be subserved by 
all goverinnent. Are these principles of less value to the people of 
New Mexico than they were to Virginia and Massachusetts in 1776? 
If we show ourselves indifferent to these great fundamental principles 



STATEHOOD FOR THE TERRITORIES. 



5 



of free government, we simply conlirm the report of this committee 
as to our capacity to o-orern ourselves. 

The proposition sulnuitted In' the committee is in effect that the 
people of the Territories are indifferent as to statehood and the results 
to he attained bv its acquisition. If history does not belie itself, the 
same answer in effect was given to the demands of the American people- 
in 1775 and 1776. If we are not grievoush' -mistaken, the opponents 
of the American colonies then contended that the patriots and states- 
men who championed free government were mere politicians seeking 
place and personal preferment. We must, too, recall the fact that the 
Tories of that da}', in every particular, occupied the same position now- 
taken by a few people in New Mexico with reference to this statehood 
movement. Such people, in all times and all countri(\s, 1)elong to the 
so-called well-to-do or rich classes — sometimes euphemistically desig- 
nated as the conser\-ative lousiness men. 

The fear that any change might injurioush' affect their own narrow, 
personal business interests dominates and controls their judgment 
and opinions. I do not believe this class is large in New Mexico. 
]\Iost of our business men are broad minded, active, and progressive, 
and recognize the fact that their interests, business and personal, are 
in common with the whole people of the Territory. 

We are led to consider whether the position taken by the Senatv 
committee is not at war with the fundami^ntal principles ingrafted in 
the Constitution of the United States. This conclusion, it seems to me, 
can not l)e escaped. have but to refer to the de])ates of 1787 to 

learn that United Stat(\s Senators neither represent areas or popu- 
lation:" they represent States, not communities. All through the 
debates in that convention the House of Representatives was desig- 
nat<'d as the first body, and the Senate the second bod}'. It is true 
that the result reach(^d by the convention was in a sense a compromise — 
an absolutely necessary one, however. But the States voted in the 
convention as States. \\'hen the roll was called the States answered, 
not their representativ(\s. The States were then as indi^structi])le as 
the Union is now. The plan of making all measures for taxation and 
exp<'nditure of i)ublic moneys originate in the House as a representa- 
tive of all the people was fornndated by Dr. Franklin after protracted 
d('I)ate in the conv(Mition and adopted substantially as formulated 
1)}- him." The subject of the admission of new States, after pro- 
tracted and earnest debate and submission of s(»veral differ(Mit reports 
l)v the connnittce, as it ap])ears in the Constitution was jiroposed 
by Gouveneur Morris. It may l)r intei-esting to call attention to 
the fact in this connection that the onl}' change made in the })r()- 
vision as first })r<)posed was as to the re(juirement that a two-thirds 
vote in Congi'ess should l)e necessar}'. This was amiMuled so that oidy 
a majority vote is i'e(|uii-«'(l for the passage of an act admitting ji State 
into the Union, as in the case of any other measure*.'' This provision 
in the Constitution was cai-ried b\ the xote of eight States, the only 
States voting against it being the (•om|)arat IncI \ small States. New 
♦lersey, Delaware, and Mar\ hui(L 

In the spirit of the Constitution, can the i-epi-escntatiNcs of X'ci inont 

"See Journal of ( 'oustitutioiuil Convention, 17S7, vol. 1, papes 278 and 279, Soot'p 
♦ ••lition. Tlic report of the cDnnnittcc suhsciiucntlv made and aduptcd. id., ();{7; 

id., mn. 

'" Id., vol. 2. pajie 4(i(). 



STATEHOOD FOR THE TERRITORIES. 



and Ma^ssachusetts deny all citizens born under the American flag full 
equality with ev^ery othei* AmcM-ican citizen l)ecause the}" do not like 
their language and because the p(M)ple of the Territory do not forswear 
their mother tongue, or because they do not like their religion? We 
are compc^lled to say that Congress has the power so to do, but not the 
constitutional nor the moral right. The report of the committee, as we 
think we have shown, proposes to adopt this policy — to make it a prin- 
ciple in American constitutional law. I read from a recent author on 
this subject, as follows: 

The question has arisen whether Congress can upon any other ground than lack 
of a rei»ul)li('an form of go\ ernnient refuse admission to a State formed out of a Terri- 
tory of the United States. 

That it may do so, practically, is undoubted, but can it be justified in keeping a 
Territory without representation and subject to the authority of the Government, 
unless upon grounds which the Constitution makes an objection to its admission? 
We have seen that the decisions have been uniform that a State admitted to the 
Union stands in its relation to the Government of the Union in no respect different 
from that which obtains between the old and original States. (Tucker on the Con- 
stitution, p. 614.) 

While considering this subject the fact at once forces itself upon us 
that in the Dominion of Canada there are communities and provinces 
where the French language has been spoken for more than one hundred 
and tiftv years, and during all of that period of time these people have 
been British subjects and an integral part of the British Empire, and 
no British statesman has ever dared to suggest that their rights should 
be abridged because they could not speak the English languagCo Nor 
is it necessary, in order to make a freeman out of a man, that he speak 
any particular language. This is equally true in the case of Louisiana. 

The committee has seen fit to object to the use of interpreters in the 
courts of New Mexico. They are used in many different localities in 
the United States. They are not used to the extent that the committee 
has claimed that they are in New Mexico. In manT of the counties 
they are not used at all. As all of us know, there are no records kept 
in the district courts of the Territory of New Mexico in any other lan- 
guage than Engdish, yet the report would seem to carry the impression 
that all the court proceedings were in the Spanish language. It has 
been more than twenty years since any man has l)een permitted to 
address the jury in the district courts of New^ Mexico in Spanish. 

If Congress should sustain the position of the committee den3dng to 
the people of New Mexico the rights which legitimate!}^ belong to them 
by treaty pledges under the general principles of American constitu- 
tional law% the only resource that is left to us is to appeal to the con- 
science of the people of th(^ LInited States. One of the greatest of the 
old original abolitionists defined agitation as an appeal to the con- 
science of a nation, outside of its laws. If w^e are denied what every 
free citizen who thinks must recognize as our right, this is the only 
remedy left us. 

Spac(* does not permit discussion of the ol)ligations resting upon the 
people of th(^ United States as the result of a solenni trcnitv made with 
Mexico, or the want of good faith toward American citizens other 
than f)f Spanish blood who have settled in New Mexico upon the 
plight(^d faith of their country and never for one moment believed 
that this faith could be treated as a matter of so little moment. 

In conclusion, we are conf ront(^d with the proposition to admit New 
Mexico and Arizona as one State. There may be some reluctance to 



STATEHOOD FOR THE TERRITORIES. 



7 



accept this compromise, but it would certainly l)e wiser to do so than to 
have both Territories left as they are. It would uot be dilhcult to adopt a 
constitution and enact a s\'stem of laws satisfactory to the people of both 
Territories: and until such time as the leo-islature could adopt a o-eneral 
code and s^'stem of laws applical)le to both Territories, the present laws 
might be left in force as applicable only to the Territorial area over 
which they are now in force. The biennial sessions of the legislature 
might for a time, for the convenience of the people of the two Terri- 
tories, be held alternately in >sew Mexico and Arizona. The sessions 
of the supreme court might be held in the same way. Indeed, it is 
not difficult to see that, with the present means of communication. State 
government could ])e administered over a State composed of both New 
Mexico and Arizona quite as conveniently as in the States of California 
and Texas: and it is apparent, too, that the advantages arising from 
the admission of the two States into the Union, and according to them 
proper representation in Congress, would more than compensate for 
any inconvenience which they might temporarily sutfer from union not 
-ought b}' them but accepted merely as a matter of iK^ctvssity. 

I regret that space does not permit me to discuss many of the (pies- 
tions upon which I have barely touched more at length. I am. how- 
ever, earnestly of the opinion that this association should give some 
formal expression to its views upon these measures now pending in 
Congress. 

\V. B. Childers. rresal-nt. 

And that at the conclusion of the reading such address, upon motion, 
was adopted as the sentiment of this association, the same was orderd 
to be printed in the minutes, and copies thereof to })e printed in pam- 
phlet form and sent by the secretar}^ to the President of the United 
States, the Secretary of the Interior, to the Attorney-Cxeneral of the 
United States, to our I)(degate in Congress, and to each Senator of the 
United States. 

In witness whereof I have hereunto subscribed my name and affixed 
the official seal of said association this the 13th dav of Januarv, A. D. 
11^03. 

[seal] EoWAIil) L. P)AKTLKTT. iSrcrrfdri/. 



NKW MKXICo's (I. ALMS KX-( JOV KltXOll IMJINCK I'LKADS S TA TKHOOl). 

loifx hdf'itji' o f f hi' Ti'ihiiiic. 

Siii: In Januarv, 1889, the Ti'ihune published a lettei- from uie 
headed "Admission of New Mexico: r)oth justice and expe(lienc\- 
<lemand it." which was intended to corn-ct gi'oss misstatements lujuh' 
inCongi-ess and in a poi-tion of the pi-es^. It is stiaiige that after 
foui'teen years the same ignorance and ])i'('judi( (' should exist and call 
for the same kind of coi-rectioii. 

Yet these foui'teeu yeai's ha\ c seen great progi-e^^ and iui|)r()\ cment 
in all material respects. In 1889 I wrote you. No Tcn itory ever 
had sueh thoi'ough preparation for statehood.'" That w a-- t rue then, 
and it is far moi'e ti ue now. 

As early as 1S5U the people (jf New Mexico, relying on the j)ledges of 
our (iovernment, held a convention, adopted a constitution, elected 



8 



STATEHOOD FOR THE TERRITORIES. 



State officers, a legislature, and W. S. Messervv as member of Con- 
gress. In July the legislature elected R. H. Weightman and F. C. 
Cunningham as Senators, and they, with the member of Congress, 
proceeded to Washington. While on the journey they were met by 
the intelligence of the passage, on September 1^, of the famous "com- 
promise measure" which admitted Califoniin as a State and j*elegated 
New Mexico to the condition of a Territory. From that time to the 
present attempts to secure admission have constanth^ ])een made, and 
Congress has not entirely failed to respond to these appeals. In 1874-75 
both Houses of the Forty-third Congr<^ss passed an enabling act, the 
House by a vote of IHO to 54 and the Senate by 32 to 11. The bill 
was slightly amended in tlie Senate and failed because it was impossible 
at the end of the session to bring it up for concurrence in the House. 
In the succeeding Congress a similar l)ill passed the Senate by a vote 
of 35 to 15, was reported favorably in th^ House, but failed to be 
reached. For twenty years scarcely a Congress has met in which an 
enabling act has not been passed in one House or the other; but by 
some accident or obstacle concurrent action has failed. If it was proper 
to admit New Mexico in 1874, ])efore it possessed a mile of railroad, a 
singh^ public building, a developed mine, a matured orchard, or an 
alfalfa tield, what reason can now l)e given for delay, when its popula- 
tion has greatly increased, its condition vastly improved, and its 
resources of all kinds are being developed into sources of wealth ? 

In the pending discussion in Congress and in most articles in the 
pi'ess the reallv great principle involved seems to be lost sight of or 
ignored: that is, the right of self-govc^rnmcjit. This is the funda- 
nu iital principle of repul)lican institutions; it is the inherent right of 
th(^ American citizen. It is our ])est heritage from our fathers. It is 
enough to make our New England Revolutionary ancestors tui'u in their 
graves to se(» th(Mi' desc(Midants deprived of these rights and held in 
bondage, and that by th(> votes of New England S(Miators. I confess it 
makes my Revolutionai-y 1)lood hot with indignation to find that the 
latest naturalized for(Mgiier in Colorado or Texas has all the rights of 
American citizenship and that, because 1 choose to cross an imaginary 
boundary line, I am deprived of the dearest of American rights, that 
of sel f -g( ) ve r mn e n t . 

A Territory has not a republican governnu^u. it is simply a province; 
its people are not citizens, th(\v are subjects. If it has bad officials, 
there is no remedy, for they are not I'cvsponsible to the people nor 
answeral)le to piihlic o))inion. If they have influence in Washington, 
they can viohite hiw and ovcu'ride justice with impunity. As a tem- 
porary expedient, when th(^ joopulation is sparse and poor and can not 
sustain local govc^rnmer.t, tlu^ Territorial condition is a necessary evil; 
but it is exceptional and temporary, and as soon as the people are able 
to become self-governing they are entitled to that right. Ever}^ 
moment of delay after that time is an outrage on their Americanism. 

I desire briefly to state a tVnv facts to show not only that New 
Mexico has long passed that exceptional period, but that, as above 
stated, it is better prepai'ed for statehood than any of the Territories 
hentofore admitted. 

l*oj)ul<iti.(nu — No Tei-ritory at the tinie of its admission, with the 
exception of Dakota and Utah, (*ontained the population now in New 
Mexico. By the census of 1900 it had 195,310 inhalntants, without 
counting the Indians on the reservations. The real population, as has 



STATEHOOD FOR THE TERRITORIES. 9 

been conclu.sively shown in public documents, was about 225,000. But 
taking" the census figures, the above statement is correct. 1 must not 
occup}^ space with the full list of the populations of Territories at the 
times of their admission, but, as examples. Tennessee. Ohio^ Indiana, 
and Illinois each had about 50,000 inhabitants. If we take the preced- 
ing census, as we are doing with New Mexico, Indiana had only 24,530, 
and Illinois 12,282. So it is evident that there is now no reason on 
account of lack of population for depriving the people of New Mexico 
of their rights as citizens. On the contrary, it has more population 
than the old State of Delaware, 50.000 more than Idaho, more than 
double that of Wyoming, and live times that of Nevada. 

If we consider the matter of natural resources and actual taxable 
valuation, we tind that in the latter she far exceeds many other new 
States, and as to the variety and extent of resources no State approaches 
her except California and Colorado, and her vast treasui'e of coal gives 
her the advantage even over those favored regions. 

The character of the population seems to be a bugbear to the 
unfriendly Senators who recently became familiar with the Territory, 
which is much larger than New England and New York combined, in 
three days. Facts, however, should carrv more weight than preju- 
dices or unfounded slanders. 

The people are loA^al. During the rebellion, out of a total popula- 
tion of H3,567, she sent 6,561 into the Army, a larger percentage than 
any Eastern State; and the victory at Glorieta saved the Pacitic slope 
to the Union. In the recent Spanish war no less than 1,089 volunteers 
enlisted, including about 500 of the Kough Kiders. who gained renown 
and made a President at San Juan Hill. 

They are American. The foreign eh^nent is smaller in New Mexico 
than anywhere else in the country except some parts of the South. 
Only 7i per cent of the population is foreign l)orn. Idaho has 21, 
Wyoming 24. Washington 25, ^Montana 43, North Dakota 45. Even 
in the older States. New York and ^lichigan have 26. Massachusetts 
Rhode Island. Wisconsin, and California 3o, and ^Minnesota 36 per 
c<'nt. 

They arc pu))lic spirited. Without the slightest aid from the National 
(xoveniment they have built a beautiful cai)itol, a sul)stantial penit(Mi- 
tiary. an insane asylum. uni\'ersity and agricultural college, school of 
mines, normal university, normal school, military institute, and blind 
asylum, and when the capitol was destroyed l)v tire they erected 
another, uhicli is the object of general admiration! Hesid(\s thes(^ T(M-- 
ritoriai institutions they ha\'e erected a nudtitud(» of county and city 
buildings. 

But to the uninformed the large luunber of citi/(Mis of Spanish 
des(;ent is looked u])on as a gra\'e misfortune. There could not be a 
greater mistake. It is the possession of that cojiservatiN'c element in 
connec-tion with the enterprising American from the East which gi\(v-; 
New Mexico her sjx-cial advantages as a self-gox'erning conuuunity. 
Evervoiu' familiar with the fai" \\'est knows that the principal danger 
in new section^ arises from the uns(;ttle(l char;ictcr of much of the 
])opulation. They are idways looking for some new place to which to 
migrates riiey are ready to vote for any amount of bonds and taxa- 
tion, and to their iii-es})on^iblc action is principally due the hea\ y 
indebtednes> of so many western counties. The chief danger in many 
H new connnunity comes fi'om this class of men, and from the over- 



10 



STATEHOOD FOR THE TERRITORIES. 



enthu.siasin of others, who think that life in the West is a continual 
boom. But New Mexico runs no such risk. She lias a stable and 
conservative element in her native population, which counteracts the 
danger. They are attached to the soil and liave no thought of leaving. 
They are naturally opposed to rash schemes which involve extravagant 
expense. Mixed with the zealous American they form an admirable 
combination. 

Another o})jection raised against us is illiteracy. Some years ago 
there may have been force in this argument, but it has disappeared. 
In no respect has New Mexico made such rapid progress as in public 
education. Even under the crude system which existed l)efore the 
public-school law of 1901, the census showed that while the population 
of the Territory increased 28 per cent during the decade from 1880 to 
1890, the number of children enrolled in the schools increased 283 per 
cent, or ten times as rapidly. During the last decade the gain has 
))een equally gratifying. The school law of 1891 gave a great impetus to 
public instruction, and the system is now very satisfactory. The total 
enrollment of scholars last year was 12,925. In this connection I wish 
to state a fact which may be a surprise, that New Mexico, with less 
than 250,000 people, now supports more public institutions of college 
grade than any State east of the Alleghanies. She has the university, 
agricultural college, normal university, school of mines, and military 
institute. All these have handsome buildings and are creditably 
administered. Where is any other community of similar population 
doing as much for higher education ^ 

Thus it will be seen that in every essential particular New Mexico 
has long passed the period when a Territorial government was neces- 
sary or justifiable. But for partisanship and prejudice it would have 
been admitted long ago. 

The right of self-government ought not to depend on the political 
views of the people interested or on party prejudices or exigencies. 
Yet we know that in practice these things do intiuence the admission 
of States, and no one has yet forgotten the long-continued injustice to 
Dakota because she was strongly Republican. But if these questions 
of political ]3olicy have to be considered there is every reason for 
Republican Senators to favor New Mexico. With the possi])le excep- 
tion of Vermont and Pennsylvania, no State in the Union is as solidly 
and reliably Republican as New M(^xico. Even the unjust treatment 
she has received in Washington can not change her allegiance. As 
long as the tariff is th(^ prominent political issue she can not be driven 
out of the party, for all hcv great products, such as wool, cattle, lead, 
coal, and timber, are benefited by protection. Erom a party point of 
view New Mexico will l)e an assured acquisition for at least a genera- 
tion. 

One word with regard to the name "New Mexico," which seems to 
be a bugbear to some f]astern niinds. All kinds of propositions are 
made for a change, a favorite suggestion l)eing Montezuma, for no con- 
ceivable reason, as there is not the slightest connection between the 
unfortunate Azte( so\'er(Mgn and this section of countr3^ On the other 
hand, "New Mexico" is an old historic name. Only one American 
State, Elorida, has a name more ancient. It was first used in 1581 by 
Espejo, more than a (juarter of a century before Jamestown, New 
Amst(M-dam, or Plymouth w(M'e thought of. On all the ancient maps it 
appears as the " Kingdom of New Mexico," extending from Elorida on' 



STATEHOOD FOR THE TERRITORIES. 



11 



the east to the Pacitic on the west. It would be vandalism to change 
a name so full of historic associations and which has endured for more 
than three centuries. 

In every respect in which she controls her own destiny. New Mexico 
is improving and advancing. Her railroad development last year 
exceeded that of the whole Atlantic seaboard. The only obstacle is the 
continued Territorial condition. That aftects both immigration and 
financial development. Statehood will l)ring good gov(^rnment and 
rapid improvement. The people will feel that they are really Ameri- 
can citizens and not aliens or servants. All this will enkindle ambi- 
tion, stimulate enterprise, and lead on to a glorious future. 

L. Bradford Prince. 

Santa Fe. N. Mex.. Jan nary 1903. 



[The Omaha World-Herald. Friday, January 23, 1903.] 
ADMIT THE TERRITORIES. 

The admission of Arizona. New ^Mexico, Oklahoma, and Indian Ter- 
ritory at this session of Congress would be an act of sim})l(^ justice. 
Besides, it would make the mainland a solid bod}^ of States, a matter 
of pride to every patriotic American. The spirit of our institutions 
is, that as soon as a Territory becomes sufficiently populated and self- 
su])porting it should })e admitted into the Union on an eciuality with 
the other States. Such Avas the purpose when Jetierson purchased the 
Louisiana territorv. and when we acquired territory- from Mexico. 
Yet for more than forty years New Mexico has been deprived of the 
rights of statehood, tirst upon one pretext and then another. The 
latest is because of the prevalence of the Spanish language. And 
right here, it is well to say, the question of language cut no figure in 
the admission of Louisiana. Missouri, and other Stat(\s where the 
French language was pre\'alent. 

Again, it is the charge of illiteracy. The facts are that in lOOO, 
according to the Twelfth Census, the school enrollnuMit of New ^lexico 
was 17.61 per cent of the population; New Jersey, 17.40 per cent; 
New York, 1().77 per cent; Connecticut, 16. 6S per cent; Massachussetts, 
16.89 per cent, and Kliode Island, 15.68 p(M' cent. Oklahoma's school 
enrollment was 1.5.01 per cent. With mon» than twice the population 
of New Mexico, the State of Senator Aldrich had an average daily 
school attendance of 41^o:']S, and New Mexico i{8,41i^ 

Hliode Island had l.lHio teachers, or 1 teacher to 2.5 scholars, and 
New Mexico 1.046 teachers, or 1 teacher to 2'1 scholai's. In Del- 
aware the pi-()j)()i'tion is 1 teacher to 81 scholars, the same as in (ieorgia. 
In \\'voming it is 1 teachei' to 17 scholars; in Nebraska. 1 to WK and 
1 to 14 in Iowa. 

Taking Nel)i"aska, Iowa, and Wyoming as the most interiigent States, 
the educational methods of New Mexico hold a laN oiable position to 
the brightest standai'd. while those of Rhode Island and ot her Atlantic 
coast States do not. Still the West with its superior intelligence. Inn - 
ing the \()t<'s to change it. is contimially called upon to bow to a domi- 
nating minority of Kastei n States, and. straiigest of all. certain West- 
ern S(Miatoi's and lve])i'e^<'ntat ixc^ in ('oiigrc^'- weai' tlic colla!' without 
shame. 



12 



STATEHOOD FOR THE TERRITORIES. 



As to population. 80 per cent of the population of these four Terri- 
tories is native white: 5 per cent is foreioii white, and 15 per cent is 
colored; but with the exception of the Indian Territory Massachusetts 
has a larger number of the colored races than any of the other three 
Territories. 

In New p]noland 73 per cent of the population is native white and 26 
per cent foreig-n. The foreigners in Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and 
Connecticut outnuml)er the total population of the four Territories. 
So, also, in New York. In New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania, 
there are AMO'ISW foreign and ll,808,TI:f) native whites. The colored 
races number 843. slH. This is equivalent to a percentage of 77 per 
cent native wliite. :I'2 pw cent foreign white, and about 2 per cent col- 
ored. 

In the four Territories in 19ol there were 5,880 miles of railway 
mileage. Of these Arizona and New Mexico had 3,312 and Oklahoma 
and Indian Territory 2,518 miles. Arizona had more miles of rail- 
way than New Hampshire, Vermont, Rhode Island, Connecticut, Dela- 
ware, or Maryland. So did New Mexico and the Indian Territory. 

In li^'e-stock values the four Territories in 1900 had $111,766,178; 
the six New England States, $70,631,088; New York. $120,673,101; 
New Jersey and Pennsylvania combined, $113,693,667; Ohio. $120,- 
466,131; Indiana, $105,048,528. and live Southern States on the Atlantic 
coast $140,877,455. 

Oklahoma and New ^Mexico live-stock values exceeded those of New 
England by nearly $15.00(),0<)0, al30ut seven times greater than that of 
Rhode Island, and ^1,000,000 more than Massachusetts. 

The value of crop products in the four Territories in 1900 was $90,- 
272,058. The Indian Territory and Connecticut product were nearly 
equal. Oklahoma was $45,447,746, which was larger than any one of 
the New England States, ]Marv land, or New Jersey. Arizona exceeded 
Rhode Island and New Mexico exceeded Delaware, yet with a smaller 
population than New Mexico Delaware has the pi'ivilege of having 
United States Senators. 

With a total population in 1900 of 1,108,632 these four Territories 
had no Senators. With a total population of 613,;^91 Delaware and 
Rhode Island had four members of the United States Senate and three 
Representatives in the House. Th(^ four Territories had one Delegate 
each. Is this fair^ 

With an excess of 495,341 over the population of Rhode Island and 
Delaware, th(\s(^ gi'eat Territories wer(^ members of the "voiceless" in 
the halls of Congress, and with unrepi-esented agricultural wealth 
amounting to more tlian $450,000,000. while these two small States, 
having a smaller population, controlling an agricultural wealth of 
$83,300,000, were favored with four Si^iators and three Representa- 
tives with the same power and privilt^ges as New York, Ohio, Illinois, 
Iowa, and Nebraska, and others of the larger commonwealths. 



(a.OWIXG TRIBUTE TO Nf.W MEXICO. 

The Boston Journal of Education, the leading educational periodical 
of th(^ United Statics. thiM^ditor of which. Dr. A. E. Winship, was here 
in attendance upon the educational conventions of Christmas week, has 



STATEHOOD FOE THE TERKITOEIES, 



13 



the following editorial utterance in its isssue of Januar}' 22. This 
can not but be of immense benefit to New Mexico, as the Journal of 
Education circulates among- the better class of teachers throughout the 
entire Union. Dr. Winship says: 

'"Those who are making a single ti'ip through our new West, or 
have never seen it, merely read descriptions, can never feel the growth 
of the United States. There are hundreds of educational people who 
could have gone to Las Vegas and addressed a large audience, could 
have met the corps of admirable men and women teachers, could 
have looked over the plant of the normal university, and pronounced 
it one of the best normal school plants of its size in the United States, 
who could have felt the significance of it all as I did. I know ])ut one 
with whom it would have been possible. 

''Twenty years ago I became fairly well acquainted with all the 
leading cities and towns in the Territory, and every two or three years 
I kept up the acquaintance until 1890, since which time 1 have only 
been through the Territory incidentally. When I knew the Territory 
there was not a free public school, not a college oi' university. The 
Catholic Church had several schools, and during the ten ^^ears that 1 
knew it other churches did about as much all told as the Catholics 
until some 1,000 children, largeh^ of the English-speaking Americans, 
were in some private or church school. With this as a background 
I could feel as well as know what it meant to address the annual meet- 
ing of the teachers- association, representing more than 1,000 public 
school teachers, to whom more than ^600,000 is annually paid from 
the Territorial treasury in salaries for teaching more than 13,000 
pupils. 

"Eleven 3^ears ago not a public school of any kind, and to-day pub- 
lic kindergartens in several cities, public manual training schools, a 
normal school at Silver City, a normal university at Las Vegas, a school 
of mines at Socorro, an agricultural college at Mesilla Park, and a uni- 
versity at Albu(pier(jU(\ with a total enrolhnent of 1,000 in the higher 
institutions. 

'•Ten years ago English was an unknown tongue over most of the 
area of New Mc^xico, whereas to-day it is taught the children of ev(uy 
count V. 

''The annual meeting of the teachers of New Mexico Avas hekl in 
the latest established of the public institutions, the Normal University 
of Las Vegas, an institution that was merely a theorv or a ho]H' tive 
years ago, but to-da}- has a beautiful and well-appointed building and 
a faculty of experts. Despite its youth, it is one of the best normal 
schools in the country, and in the natural sciences, espcc-ially. I have 
never seen it excelled. Li ethnology and entomology it is not 
approaclied in the whole country', and tlie art depai tment is superior.'' 



